1 hour ago, Leopold Bloom said:

HF: Morgan Ferres Lucas Cooke Cade Kennedy

Benjamin Buttonesque comeback there by Lucas.

I see he's added an "E" to his surname in an attempt to hide his identity.

Highly rated rucks have slipped to late 1st round. Eg, Grundy and English. Quite possible Mac Andrew will slip given his projected long runway expected development timeframe.

According to Champion Data those players selected early that are most likely to make it are players who can win their own ball hence playing the probabilities inside mids are more popular early. Goes to show how good Jackson must have been as a junior to be taken at 3.

Will be interesting to see what happens on draft night. We may well have our sights set on a player/s other than Mac. If we miss the player/s we want its possible we may trade pick 17 back in the draft or although unlikely back into next years.

It’s worth looking at how NGA’s have gone in the Draft recently. Jamarra Ugle-Hagan’s case is pretty well-documented. The Bulldogs matched Adelaide’s bid at #1 last year. But Collingwood’s 2020 NGA Reef McInnes didn’t attract as much publicity and wasn’t considered as highly in some quarters last year but he was definitely considered by many judges as a likely top 20 draft pick (the ban on matching at that range didn’t exist at the time).

Knightmare had him going at pick 11 in his final phantom draft (with Collingwood not matching) - 

Every club, every pick: ESPN's full AFL phantom draft

The big-bodied inside midfielder who set the fastest 20m sprint time at the Draft Combine, was taken at #23 as a matching bid by the Pies.

Edited October 9, 20213 yr by Chelly

Interestingly ESPN had Laurie going at pick 24 and Bowey at 36 (although had him going to Ds at that pick). Shows there are fair differences between the real AFL recruiters and the media judges.

That is why i would not be surprised to see Mac slip. JT and team were right last year and Bowey slipped due to size perceptions. Maybe same will happen with Mac due to his slight frame?

Just prior to the draft day (usually the day before) Callum Twomey usually gets top 10 fairly right due to his contacts loose lips.

Edited October 9, 20213 yr by manny100

8 minutes ago, manny100 said:

Interestingly ESPN had Laurie going at pick 24 and Bowey at 36 (although had him going to Ds at that pick). Shows there are fair differences between the real AFL recruiters and the media judges.

That is why i would not be surprised to see Mac slip. JT and team were right last year and Bowey slipped due to size perceptions. Maybe same will happen with Mac due to his slight frame?

Just prior to the draft day (usually the day before) Callum Twomey usually gets top 10 fairly right due to his contacts loose lips.

Can somebody tell me why we are so interested in a skinny project player 

The bigest question is whether all the recruiters think the way the so called draft experts think about a player, if they are correct he will end up at GWS who will have to use the pick 2 because he will not be there at 13 the so called experts think.

In 3 years what will his value be to the recruiters as a developed footballer who wishes to return to Victoria and family, if this is the way to develop your team trading players back to their original states then GWS has very little chance of progressing beyond middle to lower half of the 8.

44 minutes ago, Kent said:

Can somebody tell me why we are so interested in a skinny project player 

We may not be interested in Mac 1st round. Media ratings are usually way different to actual AFL recruiter ratings. But it also may be that the recruiting team see huge potential and that at the 'maybe' start of a Dynasty we can afford to wait to reap the benefits. Gawn took 5 years. Hawkins around 4/5  years - they were in effect project players.  So sometimes you just have to wait.

Its easier to play in a top side with great development and a great system.

JT and his team would have a ranking  and hope that who they want is available.  The risk picking a tall in the 1st round is certainly higher than picking a small or medium ball winning type - so its odds on that Mac and maybe a KPP or 2 will slip. Its wait and see.

At the start of a Dynasty you can afford to wait if there is potential huge future gains as the list ages. It may well be a left field strategy they employ to prolong success.  Lets hope Kalani White comes on in leaps and bounds.

 

An interesting discussion on the current chasing of ruckmen:  rucks-set-to-roll-around-again-until-trade-music-stops The proposition is:  "...most clubs now want to take four ruckman into a season, which ideally includes the first ruckman, a ruck-forward, a back-up ruck and a developing ruckman, maybe two".

Looking at that proposition of 4/5 ruckman, we have:

• First Ruck:  Gawn
• Ruck-Forward:  Jackson
• Back-up Ruckman:  Daw
• Developing ruckman (or two):  ?  

We did not renew Bradke's B Rookie contract and with Mac Andrew seemingly out of reach any ideas who could be our 'developing ruckman'?  Other sport prospects? Or will we not bother with a 'developing ruckman', for now?

Edited October 10, 20213 yr by Premiers

1 hour ago, Kent said:

Can somebody tell me why we are so interested in a skinny project player 

Its called sunk cost bias.  We believe we are ‘entitled’ to something on this player because of what we have invested.  A good decision for our draft pick recognised then ignores such biases, and looks at other factors against which we select the best available for us.

Its like how much you hate to lose 20 bucks compared to the positive feeling of finding 20 (ratio sits between 2:1 to 5:1 depending upon your personal makeup).  We dont want to ‘lose’ MA, even if he is only half as good as another player at the same point in the draft.

WA up narrowly in the 17s at halftime, been very inaccurate 3.7 -25 to 3.1-19

 

2 hours ago, Kent said:

Can somebody tell me why we are so interested in a skinny project player 

 

42 minutes ago, buck_nekkid said:

Its called sunk cost bias.  We believe we are ‘entitled’ to something on this player because of what we have invested.  A good decision for our draft pick recognised then ignores such biases, and looks at other factors against which we select the best available for us.

Its like how much you hate to lose 20 bucks compared to the positive feeling of finding 20 (ratio sits between 2:1 to 5:1 depending upon your personal makeup).  We dont want to ‘lose’ MA, even if he is only half as good as another player at the same point in the draft.

While important to recognise biases such as these, I would argue that (pushing NGA factors to the side) Mac Andrew would have complimented our list profile brilliantly.

Premiers just above highlighted the the current state of play re ruckman on a list.

1 hour ago, Premiers said:

An interesting discussion on the current chasing of ruckmen:  rucks-set-to-roll-around-again-until-trade-music-stops The proposition is:  "...most clubs now want to take four ruckman into a season, which ideally includes the first ruckman, a ruck-forward, a back-up ruck and a developing ruckman, maybe two".

Looking at that proposition of 4/5 ruckman, we have:

• First Ruck:  Gawn
• Ruck-Forward:  Jackson
• Back-up Ruckman:  Daw
• Developing ruckman (or two):  ?  

We did not renew Bradke's B Rookie contract and with Mac Andrew seemingly out of reach any ideas who could be our 'developing ruckman'?  Other sport prospects? Or will we not bother with a 'developing ruckman', for now?

With Mac Andrew being as highly touted as he is, having him develop underneath Gawn and Jackson could have provided him a fantastic platform to transition into the team in 3-4 years time as Gawns career winds down.

Jackson takes on the primary ruck role, Mac Andrew steps into the forward/ruck position and we again have the dominate ruck-ruck/forward combo for the next 10-15 years.

............and there is a huge difference and premium for a mobile ruck who can be a mid type when the ball hits the ground and a tall forward when required...... - as opposed to those who are primarily just a ruckman in the traditional sense. That is why the media pundits have Mac rated to 5 or 10.

Whether AFL recruiters take him early?

 

I just can’t see any club willing to part for a top 20 pick, for a kid that is so clearly a longterm ruck project. He won’t show anything for 3 years minimum, and it has been proven for years that capable rucks can be found late in the draft. Only the exceptional are taken early, and MA has not proven to be exceptional (yet).

Good longterm project for us to roll the dice on however, while we still have multiple options at that position insulating him from any short-term pressure to perform.

Edited October 10, 20213 yr by Mach5

Sheldrick seals suspenseful West Australian sweep in scrappy affair

3 hours ago, Mach5 said:

I just can’t see any club willing to part for a top 20 pick, for a kid that is so clearly a longterm ruck project. He won’t show anything for 3 years minimum, and it has been proven for years that capable rucks can be found late in the draft. Only the exceptional are taken early, and MA has not proven to be exceptional (yet).

Good longterm project for us to roll the dice on however, while we still have multiple options at that position insulating him from any short-term pressure to perform.

Why does he exclusively have to be a ruck?

He's the same height as Ben Brown, Harris Andrews, and Peter Wright.

He's been behind other rucks in his rep. games and often started forward.

 

Edited October 10, 20213 yr by dee-tox

Just how I see it.

Looking at club lists yesterday and I think we are the club with the least ruck options after our main 2. We don’t have another player over 198 except BB, who is a forward, not a ruckman.

Daw our back up, is 195 and will be 31. I am still surprised they let Bradtke go this year.

Most clubs have 4-5 200cm players who can ruck.

Also we were the worst disposal efficiency club in the AFL this year.

That is an interesting stat for the Premier, as normally you would think the Premier club has pretty clean ball use.

Edited October 10, 20213 yr by Redleg

1 hour ago, Redleg said:

Also we were the worst disposal efficiency club in the AFL this year.

That is an interesting stat for the Premier, as normally you would think the Premier club has pretty clean ball use.

Disposal efficiency has never been a useful statistic because it doesn't measure what you think it measures.

It doesn't measure how well you kick and handball, it measures how well you can maintain possession of the ball. I haven't looked at the rankings but I'd be shocked if there any correlation between DE and performance. Teams like Geelong that chip the ball around to maintain possession will be high in DE because they don't take risks with the ball. We will be very low ranked because we play very fast paced, aggressive and direct football with numbers behind the ball.

It has absolutely no relevance to how well a team kicks the footy.

Edited October 10, 20213 yr by Axis of Bob

Jack Williams looked good as a young developing Forward who had the height to also be a 2nd ruckman.  Interesting to see whether we do invest in another young key forward.   I’m still looking for pace and run and the best midfielder in pick 17 slot.  But like JVR, Williams presents a good option for JT ⭐️ to consider. 

2 hours ago, Redleg said:

Looking at club lists yesterday and I think we are the club with the least ruck options after our main 2. We don’t have another player over 198 except BB, who is a forward, not a ruckman.

Daw our back up, is 195 and will be 31. I am still surprised they let Bradtke go this year.

Most clubs have 4-5 200cm players who can ruck.

Also we were the worst disposal efficiency club in the AFL this year.

That is an interesting stat for the Premier, as normally you would think the Premier club has pretty clean ball use.

I think you have to be very careful analysing disposal efficiency in isolation. 

ie a slow, chip and mark team will always have a higher disposal efficiency, vs a team of midfield bulls, complimented by a very effective defensive structure. 

same way that you don’t analyse Trac’s disposal efficiency in isolation:- given he is a match winner, who is often biting off tough kicks vs a Tom Mitchell type, who is kicking sideways, running past for handballs etc. 

Rookie Mason Cox.

 

5 minutes ago, Ungarieboy said:

Rookie Mason Cox.

 

Not a ruckman and it would be a stretch to call him a forward. Commanding $500K its a no thanks from me.

Teams have worked him out. Body him out and run the ball out and he cant do anything about it.

7 hours ago, spirit of norm smith said:

Jack Williams looked good as a young developing Forward who had the height to also be a 2nd ruckman.  Interesting to see whether we do invest in another young key forward.   I’m still looking for pace and run and the best midfielder in pick 17 slot.  But like JVR, Williams presents a good option for JT ⭐️ to consider. 

The problem in assessing yesterday’s game was the fact that both sides missed 3 or 4 top players which meant an automatic diminishing of the standard of football which was not helped by the windy conditions at an open ground. I don’t think Thebarton Oval was such a good venue and assume the Adelaide Oval is being prepared for cricket.

If you’re looking for a ruck prospect, none of the ones on show yesterday would qualify IMO. Williams would be a part timer at best - like TMac or Weed. When the two states played a month ago, WA’s ruckman looked ok but nowhere near as good a prospect as Toby Conway of Geelong Falcons who is the best of the young crop and I reckon would be available in the mid 20s.

Shifter Sheehan’s started to release his profiles of the current crop, starting with the half forwards. Draper the standout, Howes is the one I really like here:

https://www.afl.com.au/news/684085

Anyone seen much of Fejo jnr? I know this is a highlights package, but wow: